Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010267732025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3900/2025 ABUL KALAM AZAD S/O- LT. ALTAB ALI R/O- KADOMONI PATHAR, P.S.- JURIA, DISTRICT- NAGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:KULSUMA KHATUN W/O IMRAN HUSSAIN R/O 7 NO. CHITALMARI PATHAR P.O. CHITALMARI BILL P.S. JURIA DSIT. NAGAON ASSAM PIN-78212 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M H AHMED, I AMIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. B. KUMAR (R-2),MR ROBIUL HOQUE(R-2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER Date : 19-12-2025 Heard Mr. M.H Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D.P. Page No.# 2/6 Goswami, learned Addl. P.P appearing for the State and Mr. R. Haque, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2 and Ms. B.M Deka, learned Standing counsel appearing for the Education department. This application has been filed under section 483 of BNSS praying for granting bail to the accused petitioner in connection with Juria P.S Case No. 264/2025 u/s 8/9(f)/12 of the POCSO Act. By the earlier order dated 11.12.2025, this Court had recorded as follows. 3. This bail application arises from an FIR dated 25.10.2025, lodged by Kulsuma Khatun (Vice President of 7 No. Chitalmari Pathar MKB Muktab Bidyalaya) wherein an allegation had been leveled against the accused applicant that while serving as the Headmaster of the aforesaid school, the accused applicant had been indulging in acts of sexually harassing the minor children of the school and on the specific date, three minor children were inappropriately touched by the accused applicant. Accordingly, Sutirpar PP GDE No. 344 dated 24.10.2025 was made and forwarded to the OC, Juria Police Station, where the records were received and accordingly, Juria PS Case No. 264/2025, under Sections 8/9(f)/12 of the POCSO Act was registered. 4. This matter was moved on 04.12.2025 and the matter was fixed today calling for the Case Diary. The Case Diary is yet to be received. 5. The Office Note dated 08.12.2025 shows that the service report on the respondent No. 2 is awaited. However, Mr R. Hoque, learned counsel has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent No. 2 by filing Vakalatnama. The learned counsel submits that his client has received information of this case through a friend and, therefore, he has been instructed to appear today. 6. When the matter was taken up the learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the allegations leveled in the FIR are wholly false and had been made only because new funds have come to the school and there was an enmity with some persons who had manipulated the circumstances to have the FIR lodged. Page No.# 3/6 7. The learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 has submitted that respondent No. 2 would have no objection if the privilege of bail is allowed to the applicant herein, since the parents of the alleged victims as referred to in the FIR have submitted apology letters to the respondent No. 2, stating that the they had instigated the respondent No. 2 to file the case on wrong premises. The records produced by the learned counsel for the applicant shows that the minor children had already given statements under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023, against the applicant. 8. The situation created in the present case is a sorry state of affairs. When allegations are leveled against the Head of the Institute, where minor children are sent for education and then in bail proceedings, the informant comes up to state that the FIR was lodged on misinformation, this Court cannot take the matter lightly. It is also noticed that it was not the parents of the alleged students who were ill-treated at the hands of the accused applicant who have filed the FIR. The students before the learned Magistrate while recording their statements under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023, have implicated the applicant as reflected in the orders of the learned Special Judge (POCSO). The accused applicant has been behind bars for the last 47 days, based on an FIR which now, the respondent No. 2 claims was filed due to misinformation. Today, when the matter has been called, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 has submitted that he had filed an affidavit as required by this Court. On perusal of the affidavit, this Court finds three letters purportedly issued to the informant/respondent No. 2 allegedly by the parents of the victim students. The first of the letters is by one of the parents who has stated that he was not present at the time when the allegation of sexual harassment was brought against the Headmaster and later on, he came to know that the name of his daughter was also involved in the matter and on enquiry, the daughter told him that some people influenced and compelled her to make the statement as instructed by them against Page No.# 4/6 her will. The parent of the minor had further stated that the minor child has informed her that the teacher treats her very well and she even demands that the teacher should be brought home. The parent of the second child has filed an application to the respondent No. 2, whereby he has stated that it was on a misunderstanding that he had made a complaint against the petitioner herein. He has stated that he repents his mistake and that there was no assault on the minor children of any kind by the petitioner herein. The parent of the third child has stated that some mischievous person had levelled allegations against the petitioner herein and being influenced by them and on a misunderstanding, he had submitted the complaint against the headmaster of the school. He has expressed regret since according to him the petitioner is a simple man and a very religious person and he is totally innocent. This Court is shocked at the developments as recorded hereinabove. The petitioner in this case is a person aged about 57 years and he has stated in his petition that he has been serving as a teacher since 1993. From the affidavit filed by the respondent No. 2 which is supported by the letters of the parents of the three minor children, it appears to this Court that the present case may be one where the petitioner has been mischievously involved in a complaint with allegations which may not be correct at all. First of all, the respondent No. 2 has had lodged the FIR on 25.10.2025 and even at a stage when the petitioner was arrested, she did not come forward to say that she was neither a witness nor that she did not receive any complaint directly from the minor girls. It is only on receipt of notice from this Court that she has now filed an affidavit annexing letters of the parents of the three minor children as aforesaid. Given the aforesaid position, this Court is of the prima facie view that the petitioner may have been falsely implicated in the FIR lodged against him by the respondent No. 2. However, the said is a matter of inquiry and investigation which can be done only by referring to the different records and by examining the persons Page No.# 5/6 involved in the incident. It is more intriguing is that the children on their appearance before the learned Magistrate and during recording of their statements under provisions of Section 183 of the BNSS had implicated the petitioner. This is in contrast to the stand now taken by the parents of the said children. Thus, it is apparent that either the children were tutored prior to their appearance before the learned Magistrate to support the allegations of the FIR or there are manipulations thereafter which has led to the present stand of the respondent No. 2. The matter involves young students, who have appear to have been tutored and manipulated. In such a view of the matter, this Court deems it fit to direct the petitioner to approach the Court of the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Nagaon with a certified copy of this order and with certified copies of the affidavit filed by the respondent No. 2 in the present case and to pray for grant of bail and/or for such other relief that he may be entitled to, including compensation etc. on the basis of the stand now being taken by not only the informant but also by the parents of the minor victim children. The learned Special Judge (POCSO) shall be at liberty to consider all the relevant facts, including those which have been revealed in these proceedings, while considering the prayers of the petitioner. The learned Special Judge (POCSO), Nagaon may also cause an inquiry into the circumstances under which the FIR, which is now sought to be termed to be a result of mischief and fake allegations had come to be lodged, the circumstances and the persons involved in tutoring the minor children to make varying statements and the persons involved in misusing the process of law. The learned Special Judge (POCSO) would be at liberty to obtain the assistance of the local police authority and such other agency as may be deemed necessary for the purposes of the enquiry. Depending upon the findings arrived at, appropriate proceedings may also be initiated against those found to have abused the process of law. A copy of this order be transmitted to the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Page No.# 6/6 Nagaon. Ms. B M Deka, learned Standing counsel for the department of Education has produced the instructions received by her from the department. The same are kept on record and marked collectively as “x”. Accordingly, this Bail application stands disposed of. A copy of this order be supplied to Ms B.M Deka, learned Standing counsel for her doing the needful. JUDGE Comparing Assistant